DOCSLIB.ORG

Population Genetics – Genetic Drift & the Bottleneck Effect

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Population Genetics – Genetic Drift & the Bottleneck Effect Population Genetics – Genetic Drift & the Bottleneck Effect INTRODUCTION Genetic drift is a change in allele frequencies in small populations that appears to occur as a consequence of random chance. It’s like flipping a coin ten times and getting 8 heads and only 2 tails. You believe from your understanding of probability that if you flip the coin often enough, you will ultimately get heads and tails each with a frequency of 0.5 (or 50%) for all flips considered together. The problem with small populations is that they can only produce a limited number of offspring in each generation, and therefore may not produce the expected proportion of a particular genotype in a given generation. Unlike the coin flip example, the parent population can’t go back to the gene pool and have some more offspring until they get the expected proportions right. A consequence of this may be what is known as genetic fixation of an allele, wherein all forms of an allele but one are lost purely by chance within the population. Genetic drift becomes a factor for evolution in populations that are formed from a small sample of a larger population by either the bottleneck effect or the founder effect. Genetic drift is a change in the relative frequency of an allele due to random fluctuation in an isolated population. The bottleneck effect occurs when a population passes through a period in which most of the population is killed by natural disaster, disease, or excessive predator pressure. The limited genetic variability seen in the world’s cheetah population is attributed to the bottleneck effect of disease, habitat destruction, and overhunting by humans. The founder effect occurs when a small portion of the population is transplanted to a new geographic locale. This fragment of the original population establishes its own niche in the new territory. Because the founder population doesn’t represent the genetic diversity of the parent population, it becomes genetically different from the parent population. A prime example of the founder effect in humans occurs in the northeastern United States within the Old Order Amish Sect. This population was established by approximately 200 migrants from Switzerland and Germany beginning in the early 18th century. Amish church membership begins with baptism (usually between the ages of 16 and 25). Once a person has affiliated with the church, he or she may only marry within the faith. Members who do not conform to the expectations of the church are excommunicated and shunned. This traditional requirement forbidding marriage outside of the sect has formed a closed genetic unit. From the small founder population of immigrants, it is estimated that the Amish population living in Canada and the United States has grown to ¼ million. Due to their intermarriage (resulting in a degree of inbreeding), some Amish groups have increased incidences of certain genetic disorders, including dwarfism (Ellis-van Creveld syndrome) and various metabolic disorders. Some of these disorders are quite rare and are serious enoughto increase the mortality rate among Amish children. The majority of Amish accept these conditions as “Gottes Wille” (God’s will); they reject the use of preventative genetic tests prior to marriage and genetic testing of unborn children to discover genetic disorders. However, the Amish are willing to participate in studies of genetic diseases and their contributions have furthered our understanding of the inheritance of numerous diseases. Watch this brief news clip about the Amish: http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=700552n&tag=contentBody;storyMediaBox Let us now investigate what will be the effect on allele frequencies that results by subjecting a population either to the bottleneck or founder effect. PROCEDURE 1. Using your beads and containers, establish a gene pool of 100 alleles in which the frequency of each allele will be 0.5. (In other words, add 50 red beads and 50 white beads to your cup.) 2. Remove 8 pairs of alleles to establish the allele frequencies of the bottleneck or founder population. Don’t do this by sampling with replacement! These are organisms in the existing population, not members of the next generation. 3. Use these eight individuals to establish the gene pool for the next generation. Prepare a container with 100 beads in the same frequency proportions. This is your gene pool for the next generation. 4. Mix the beads well and pick 8 pairs of alleles again as in step 2. The founder or bottleneck population is practicing replacement reproduction, i.e., having two offspring for each mating pair. Using these 8 pairs, establish a container of 100 beads with the allele frequencies that occurred in the 8 pairs to form the gene pool for the next generation of 8 offspring. 5. Continue this activity until one allele becomes fixed in the population (only one color is drawn) or you reach the 9th generation. Record your results in the table on the next page. DISCUSSION OF THE RESULTS 1. In what generation did one of the two alleles become fixed? _____________ If you did not achieve allele fixation in nine generations, what was the lowest frequency that one allele reached? ___________ 2. Graph the change in frequencies of the two alleles over time on the graph paper provided. a) Did the same allele go to fixation for every group in the class? b) Based on the experimental design, why should either allele have an equal opportunity to go to fixation? c) Did all the graphs in the class look the same? _____ If they did not, why didn’t they? .
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Microevolution and the Genetics of Populations ​ ​ Microevolution Refers to Varieties Within a Given Type
    Chapter 8: Evolution Lesson 8.3: Microevolution and the Genetics of Populations ​ ​ Microevolution refers to varieties within a given type. Change happens within a group, but the descendant is clearly of the same type as the ancestor. This might better be called variation, or adaptation, but the changes are "horizontal" in effect, not "vertical." Such changes might be accomplished by "natural selection," in which a trait ​ ​ ​ ​ within the present variety is selected as the best for a given set of conditions, or accomplished by "artificial selection," such as when dog breeders produce a new breed of dog. Lesson Objectives ● Distinguish what is microevolution and how it affects changes in populations. ● Define gene pool, and explain how to calculate allele frequencies. ● State the Hardy-Weinberg theorem ● Identify the five forces of evolution. Vocabulary ● adaptive radiation ● gene pool ● migration ● allele frequency ● genetic drift ● mutation ● artificial selection ● Hardy-Weinberg theorem ● natural selection ● directional selection ● macroevolution ● population genetics ● disruptive selection ● microevolution ● stabilizing selection ● gene flow Introduction Darwin knew that heritable variations are needed for evolution to occur. However, he knew nothing about Mendel’s laws of genetics. Mendel’s laws were rediscovered in the early 1900s. Only then could scientists fully understand the process of evolution. Microevolution is how individual traits within a population change over time. In order for a population to change, some things must be assumed to be true. In other words, there must be some sort of process happening that causes microevolution. The five ways alleles within a population change over time are natural selection, migration (gene flow), mating, mutations, or genetic drift.
    [Show full text]
  • Working at the Interface of Phylogenetics and Population
    Molecular Ecology (2007) 16, 839–851 doi: 10.1111/j.1365-294X.2007.03192.x WorkingBlackwell Publishing Ltd at the interface of phylogenetics and population genetics: a biogeographical analysis of Triaenops spp. (Chiroptera: Hipposideridae) A. L. RUSSELL,* J. RANIVO,†‡ E. P. PALKOVACS,* S. M. GOODMAN‡§ and A. D. YODER¶ *Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, Yale University, New Haven, CT 06520, USA, †Département de Biologie Animale, Université d’Antananarivo, Antananarivo, BP 106, Madagascar, ‡Ecology Training Program, World Wildlife Fund, Antananarivo, BP 906 Madagascar, §The Field Museum of Natural History, Division of Mammals, 1400 South Lake Shore Drive, Chicago, IL 60605, USA, ¶Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, PO Box 90338, Duke University, Durham, NC 27708, USA Abstract New applications of genetic data to questions of historical biogeography have revolutionized our understanding of how organisms have come to occupy their present distributions. Phylogenetic methods in combination with divergence time estimation can reveal biogeo- graphical centres of origin, differentiate between hypotheses of vicariance and dispersal, and reveal the directionality of dispersal events. Despite their power, however, phylo- genetic methods can sometimes yield patterns that are compatible with multiple, equally well-supported biogeographical hypotheses. In such cases, additional approaches must be integrated to differentiate among conflicting dispersal hypotheses. Here, we use a synthetic approach that draws upon the analytical strengths of coalescent and population genetic methods to augment phylogenetic analyses in order to assess the biogeographical history of Madagascar’s Triaenops bats (Chiroptera: Hipposideridae). Phylogenetic analyses of mitochondrial DNA sequence data for Malagasy and east African Triaenops reveal a pattern that equally supports two competing hypotheses.
    [Show full text]
  • Muller's Ratchet As a Mechanism of Frailty and Multimorbidity
    bioRxivMuller’s preprint ratchetdoi: https://doi.org/10.1101/439877 and frailty ; this version posted[Type Octoberhere] 10, 2018. The copyright holder Govindarajufor this preprint and (which Innan was not certified by peer review) is the author/funder. All rights reserved. No reuse allowed without permission. 1 Muller’s ratchet as a mechanism of frailty and multimorbidity 2 3 Diddahally R. Govindarajua,b,1, 2, and Hideki Innanc,1,2 4 5 aDepartment of Human Evolutionary Biology, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA 02138; 6 and bThe Institute of Aging Research, Albert Einstein College of Medicine, Bronx, 7 NY 1046, and cGraduate University for Advanced Studies, Hayama, Kanagawa, 8 240-0193, Japan 9 10 11 12 Authors contributions: D.R.G., H.I designed study, performed research, contributed new 13 analytical tools, analyzed data and wrote the paper 14 15 The authors declare no conflict of interest 16 1D.R.G., and H.I. contributed equally to this work and listed alphabetically 17 2 Correspondence: Email: [email protected]; [email protected] 18 19 Senescence | mutation accumulation | asexual reproduction | somatic cell-lineages| 20 organs and organ systems |Muller’s ratchet | fitness decay| frailty and multimorbidity 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 1 bioRxivMuller’s preprint ratchetdoi: https://doi.org/10.1101/439877 and frailty ; this version posted[Type Octoberhere] 10, 2018. The copyright holder Govindarajufor this preprint and (which Innan was not certified by peer review) is the author/funder. All rights reserved. No reuse allowed without permission. 33 Mutation accumulation has been proposed as a cause of senescence.
    [Show full text]
  • Genetic Drift Lab
    Genetic Drift Lab Small population sizes are more strongly influenced by random events than large populations. This means that the genetic frequencies of alleles in small populations are more likely to vary from one generation to the next from the original population. Often, genetic variation is rapidly lost in small populations and random events can create rapid genetic changes or microevolution in such cases. Populations may be subject to this random genetic drift (rapid movement of allele frequencies) by one of two events that reduce population size. 1. Bottlenecks - an incident reduces the overall number of individuals in a population and only a few survive to produce the next generation. Evidence of bottlenecks have been discovered in many species, such as cheetahs and the northern elephant seal. 2. Founder effect - a small number of individuals disperse and colonize new habitat, founding a new population. Organisms colonizing new habitats, such as islands, or migrating to new areas are also common. In both cases the surviving or founding individuals will often vary in genetic frequency from the parental populations (original sources). Also, small subsequent population size plays a big role in additional changes to the gene frequencies. I. Simulation of random events (coin tosses): Each student flips a coin 10 times. What are the expected number of heads for 10 flips? How many heads did you obtain for your 10 flips? _______ # students in your class ___________ # times heads appeared out of 10 trials for all students: 0 _____ 1 ______ 2 _______ 3 ______ 4 ______ 5 ______ 6 _____ 7 _______ 8 ______ 9 ______ 10 ______ How many total times did the replications meet the expected number of heads _______ How many times did the replications not meet this? __________ II.
    [Show full text]
  • Population Genetics
    Population Genetics • Study of the distribution of alleles in populations and causes of allele frequency changes Key Concepts • Diploid individuals carry two alleles at every locus Homozygous: alleles are the same Heterozygous: alleles are different • Evolution: change in allele frequencies from one generation to the next Distinguishing Among Sources of Phenotypic Variation in Populations • Discrete vs. continuous • Genotype or environment (nature vs. nurture) • Phenotypic Plasticity (revisited) Phenotypic variation - Discrete vs. Continuous Polygenic Control can create Continuous Variation Phenotypic Variation - Discrete vs. Continuous Quantitative or Continuous or Metric Variation, very often Polygenic Phenotypic variation - genotype or environment? Phenotypic variation - genotype or environment? Mechanisms of Evolutionary Change – “Microevolutionary Processes” • Mutation: Ultimate natural resource of evolution, occurs at the molecular level in DNA. • Natural Selection: A difference, on average, between the survival or fecundity of individuals with certain arrays of phenotypes as compared to individuals with alternative phenotypes. • Migration: The movement of alleles from one population to another, typically by the movement of individuals or via long-range dispersal of gametes. • Genetic Drift: Change in the frequencies of alleles in a population resulting from chance variation in the survival and/or reproductive success of individuals; results in nonadaptive evolution (e.g., bottlenecks). These combined forces affect changes at the level of individuals, populations, and species. What is Population Genetics? • The study of alleles becoming more or less common over time. • Applied Meiosis: Application of Mendel’s Law of segregation of alleles. • Hardy-Weinberg Equilibrium Principle: Acts as a null hypothesis for tracking allele and genotype frequencies in a population in the absence of evolutionary forces.
    [Show full text]
  • Basic Population Genetics Outline
    Basic Population Genetics Bruce Walsh Second Bangalore School of Population Genetics and Evolution 25 Jan- 5 Feb 2016 1 Outline • Population genetics of random mating • Population genetics of drift • Population genetics of mutation • Population genetics of selection • Interaction of forces 2 Random-mating 3 Genotypes & alleles • In a diploid individual, each locus has two alleles • The genotype is this two-allele configuration – With two alleles A and a – AA and aa are homozygotes (alleles agree) – Aa is a heterozygote (alleles are different) • With an arbitrary number of alleles A1, .., An – AiAi are homozgyotes – AiAk (for i different from k) are heterozygotes 4 Allele and Genotype Frequencies Given genotype frequencies, we can always compute allele Frequencies. For a locus with two alleles (A,a), freq(A) = freq(AA) + (1/2)freq(Aa) The converse is not true: given allele frequencies we cannot uniquely determine the genotype frequencies If we are willing to assume random mating, freq(AA) = [freq(A)]2, Hardy-Weinberg freq(Aa) = 2*freq(A)*freq(a) proportions 5 For k alleles • Suppose alleles are A1 , .. , An – Easy to go from genotype to allele frequencies – Freq(Ai) = Freq(AiAi) + (1/2) Σ freq(AiAk) • Again, assumptions required to go from allele to genotype frequencies. • With n alleles, n(n+1)/2 genotypes • Under random-mating – Freq(AiAi) = Freq(Ai)*Freq(Ai) – Freq(AiAk) =2*Freq(Ai)*Freq(Ak) 6 Hardy-Weinberg 7 Importance of HW • Under HW conditions, no – Drift (i.e., pop size is large) – Migration/mutation (i.e., no input ofvariation
    [Show full text]
  • 5. EVOLUTION AS a POPULATION-GENETIC PROCESS 5 April 2020
    æ 5. EVOLUTION AS A POPULATION-GENETIC PROCESS 5 April 2020 With knowledge on rates of mutation, recombination, and random genetic drift in hand, we now consider how the magnitudes of these population-genetic features dictate the paths that are open vs. closed to evolutionary exploitation in various phylogenetic lineages. Because historical contingencies exist throughout the Tree of Life, we cannot expect to derive from first principles the source of every molecular detail of cellular diversification. We can, however, use established theory to address more general issues, such as the degree of attainable molecular refinement, rates of transition from one state to another, and the degree to which nonadaptive processes (mutation and random genetic drift) contribute to phylogenetic diversification. Substantial reviews of the field of evolutionary theory appear in Charlesworth and Charlesworth (2010) and Walsh and Lynch (2018). Much of the field is con- cerned with the mechanisms maintaining genetic variation within populations, as this ultimately dictates various aspects of the short-term response to selection. Here, however, we are primarily concerned with long-term patterns of phylogenetic diver- sification, so the focus is on the divergence of mean phenotypes. This still requires some knowledge of the principles of population genetics, as evolutionary divergence is ultimately a consequence of the accrual of genetic modifications at the population level. All evolutionary change initiates as a transient phase of genetic polymor- phism, during which mutant alleles navigate the rough sea of random genetic drift, often being evaluated on various genetic backgrounds, with some paths being more accessible to natural selection than others.
    [Show full text]
  • Evaluating the Effects of Genetic Drift and Natural Selection in Drosophila Melanogaster
    Tested Studies for Laboratory Teaching Proceedings of the Association for Biology Laboratory Education Vol. 32, 195-210, 2011 Evaluating the Effects of Genetic Drift and Natural Selection in Drosophila melanogaster Elizabeth Welsh Biology Department, Dalhousie University, 1355 Oxford Street, Halifax, Nova Scotia, B3H 4J1 ([email protected]) This laboratory provides a “hands on” experimental approach to illustrate evolution in a semester-long study us- ing red-eye and white-eye phenotypes of Drosophila melanogaster. Students set up and maintain small and large fly populations for several generations to observe the effects of genetic drift and natural selection. They record the phenotypes, calculate allele frequencies and at the end of the semester, submit a formal laboratory report on this experiment which includes chi-square tests, and graphs of allele frequencies, heterozygosity and Fst values. They gain valuable practical, analytical, and writing experience from this experiment. Keywords: evolution, Drosophila melanogaster, natural selection, evolution, genetic drift, population size, hetero- zygosity Introduction Introduction This laboratory has been adapted from one developed Timing at the University of Toronto (Goldman, C., 1991). It is cur- One thing to consider is that because it is an ongoing se- rently used in the second year Evolution class at Dalhousie mester -long experiment, it does take up a bit of time, and University, which is a required class for all Biology Majors. other labs need to be organized around the fly lab schedule. Drosophila melanogaster has proven to be an ideal organ- Our labs are two hours long. We do an introductory lab dur- ism for an undergraduate laboratory in evolution because it ing which we go over administrative details of the laborato- is relatively easy to maintain and has a short life cycle.
    [Show full text]
  • Evolutionary Pluralism and the Ideal of a Unified Biology
    História, Ciências, Saúde-Manguinhos ISSN: 0104-5970 ISSN: 1678-4758 Casa de Oswaldo Cruz, Fundação Oswaldo Cruz Araújo, Leonardo Augusto Luvison; Reis, Claudio Ricardo Martins dos Pluralismo evolutivo e o ideal de unificação da biologia História, Ciências, Saúde-Manguinhos, vol. 28, no. 2, 2021, pp. 393-411 Casa de Oswaldo Cruz, Fundação Oswaldo Cruz DOI: https://doi.org/10.1590/S0104-59702021000200004 Available in: https://www.redalyc.org/articulo.oa?id=386167870004 How to cite Complete issue Scientific Information System Redalyc More information about this article Network of Scientific Journals from Latin America and the Caribbean, Spain and Journal's webpage in redalyc.org Portugal Project academic non-profit, developed under the open access initiative Evolutionary pluralism and the ideal of a unified biology Evolutionary pluralism and the ideal of a unified biology ARAÚJO, Leonardo Augusto Luvison; REIS, Claudio Ricardo Martins dos. Evolutionary pluralism and the ideal of a unified biology.História, Ciências, Saúde – Manguinhos, Rio de Janeiro, v.28, n.2, abr.-jun. 2021. Available at: http://dx.doi. org/10.1590/S0104-59702021000200004. Abstract Biological evolution is often regarded as a central and unifying axis of biology. This article discusses historical aspects of this ideal of unification, as well as signs of its disintegration from the 1960s to 1980s. We argue that despite new proposals for the synthesis of biological knowledge, contemporary evolutionary biology is characterized by pluralism. The main points in favor of evolutionary pluralism are discussed and some consequences of this perspective are presented, particularly in terms of the ideal of a unified biology. Finally, we defend an evolutionary pluralism that critiques the ideal of unification as a scientific objective, but still favors local Leonardo Augusto Luvison Araújoi integrations.
    [Show full text]
  • “Practical Course on Molecular Phylogeny and Population Genetics”
    Dottorato di Ricerca “Biologia Molecolare, Cellulare ed Ambientale” Corsi dottorali per l’A.A. 2017 “Practical course on Molecular Phylogeny and Population Genetics” Emiliano Mancini, PhD 22-24 February 2017 AIMS The purpose of this practical course is to familiarize participants with the basic concepts of molecular phylogeny and population genetics and to offer a first hands-on training on data analysis. Hands-on learning activities are aimed to put concepts into practice and will be conducted using software dedicated to molecular phylogeny and population genetics analyses. COURSE PROGRAM Lessons will be held in AULA 7 (Department of Sciences, Viale G. Marconi, 446, 1st floor) . 22th February 2017 - MOLECULAR PHYLOGENY (THEORY & PRACTICE) PRINCIPLES. (9.30 - 13.00): Introduction to molecular phylogeny: aims and terminology; Alignment: finding homology among sequences; Genetic distances: modelling substitutions and measuring changes; Inferring trees: Distance, Maximum Parsimony, Likelihood and Bayesian methods; Tree accuracy: bootstrap; Molecular clocks: global and relaxed models. PRACTICE. (14.30 - 18.00): From chromatograms to dataset preparation; introduction to phylogenetic software; Practice on: i) alignment; ii) substitution models, tree building and molecular clock; iii) Bayesian tree reconstruction; iv) bootstrap and phylogenetic trees congruence. 23th February 2017 - POPULATION GENETICS (THEORY) PRINCIPLES. (9.30 - 13.00): Introduction to population genetics: aims and terminology; Hardy- Weinberg equilibrium: observed vs. expected genotype frequencies; Quantifying genetic diversity: diploid and haploid data; Genetic drift and effective population size (Ne): bottleneck and founder effects; Quantifying loss of heterozygosity: the inbreeding coefficient (FIS); Quantifying population subdivision: the fixation index (FST); Linkage disequilibrium (LD): measuring association among loci; Gene genealogies and molecular evolution: testing neutrality under the coalescent.
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 23: Population Genetics (Microevolution)  Microevolution Is a Change in Allele Frequencies Or Genotype Frequencies in a Population Over Time
    Chapter 23: Population Genetics (Microevolution) Microevolution is a change in allele frequencies or genotype frequencies in a population over time Genetic equilibrium in populations: the Hardy-Weinberg theorem Microevolution is deviation from Hardy- Weinberg equilibrium Genetic variation must exist for natural selection to occur . • Explain what terms in the Hardy- Weinberg equation give: – allele frequencies (dominant allele, recessive allele, etc.) – each genotype frequency (homozygous dominant, heterozygous, etc.) – each phenotype frequency . Chapter 23: Population Genetics (Microevolution) Microevolution is a change in allele frequencies or genotype frequencies in a population over time Genetic equilibrium in populations: the Hardy-Weinberg theorem Microevolution is deviation from Hardy- Weinberg equilibrium Genetic variation must exist for natural selection to occur . Microevolution is a change in allele frequencies or genotype frequencies in a population over time population – a localized group of individuals capable of interbreeding and producing fertile offspring, and that are more or less isolated from other such groups gene pool – all alleles present in a population at a given time phenotype frequency – proportion of a population with a given phenotype genotype frequency – proportion of a population with a given genotype allele frequency – proportion of a specific allele in a population . Microevolution is a change in allele frequencies or genotype frequencies in a population over time allele frequency – proportion of a specific allele in a population diploid individuals have two alleles for each gene if you know genotype frequencies, it is easy to calculate allele frequencies example: population (1000) = genotypes AA (490) + Aa (420) + aa (90) allele number (2000) = A (490x2 + 420) + a (420 + 90x2) = A (1400) + a (600) freq[A] = 1400/2000 = 0.70 freq[a] = 600/2000 = 0.30 note that the sum of all allele frequencies is 1.0 (sum rule of probability) .
    [Show full text]
  • The Structure of Evolutionary Theory: Beyond Neo-Darwinism, Neo
    1 2 3 The structure of evolutionary theory: Beyond Neo-Darwinism, 4 Neo-Lamarckism and biased historical narratives about the 5 Modern Synthesis 6 7 8 9 10 Erik I. Svensson 11 12 Evolutionary Ecology Unit, Department of Biology, Lund University, SE-223 62 Lund, 13 SWEDEN 14 15 Correspondence: [email protected] 16 17 18 19 1 20 Abstract 21 The last decades have seen frequent calls for a more extended evolutionary synthesis (EES) that 22 will supposedly overcome the limitations in the current evolutionary framework with its 23 intellectual roots in the Modern Synthesis (MS). Some radical critics even want to entirely 24 abandon the current evolutionary framework, claiming that the MS (often erroneously labelled 25 “Neo-Darwinism”) is outdated, and will soon be replaced by an entirely new framework, such 26 as the Third Way of Evolution (TWE). Such criticisms are not new, but have repeatedly re- 27 surfaced every decade since the formation of the MS, and were particularly articulated by 28 developmental biologist Conrad Waddington and paleontologist Stephen Jay Gould. 29 Waddington, Gould and later critics argued that the MS was too narrowly focused on genes and 30 natural selection, and that it ignored developmental processes, epigenetics, paleontology and 31 macroevolutionary phenomena. More recent critics partly recycle these old arguments and 32 argue that non-genetic inheritance, niche construction, phenotypic plasticity and developmental 33 bias necessitate major revision of evolutionary theory. Here I discuss these supposed 34 challenges, taking a historical perspective and tracing these arguments back to Waddington and 35 Gould. I dissect the old arguments by Waddington, Gould and more recent critics that the MS 36 was excessively gene centric and became increasingly “hardened” over time and narrowly 37 focused on natural selection.
    [Show full text]